A BUSINESSMAN embarked on a frightening campaign of harassment against a woman who had accused his childhood friend of rape.

Abdul Rehman made hundreds of silent phone calls to his victim, a client, over the first six months of last year. On Friday he was found guilty of harassment at Woking Magistrates’ Court.

The 55-year-old from Maybury Hill was fined £650, ordered to pay his victim £400 compensation and banned from going near her.

The woman, who had accused Rehman’s friend of 30 years Shabir Quasid of raping her, broke down in tears as she told the bench about the persistent harassment.

She said: “They [the calls] were constant. They were silent. It would happen at midnight, 1am, 2am, 6am, 7am. It happened all the time.

“They disturbed my life. I couldn’t sleep. I couldn’t concentrate on my work. I couldn’t eat. I was getting up at night and eating then. I haven’t been able to get the weight off since. I just suffered from these phone calls. I wouldn’t want anyone to go through what I went through. I’m sorry.”

The woman, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, then broke down in tears.

Mr Quasid was acquitted of rape at Guildford Crown Court in December. He had been charged in June and the silent phone calls ended shortly after.

The woman reported the phone calls to the police after she was advised to do so by Victim Support counsellors.

Telephone records later revealed the 500 calls or more were made from telephones registered to Rehman and his wife, the court heard. Rehman pleaded not guilty and told investigating officers his wife was not involved in the harassment.

n Rehman’s defence, David Castle questioned the victim on what his client’s motive would be for harassing a client who he was making a lot of money from.

He said: “The crux of this case is that you say Mr Rehmam embarked on a course of conduct which he knew would have caused you alarm, harassment or distress.

“Therefore one of the issues at the centre of this is why, given your profitable relationship in business together, would he want to make your life hell through these telephone calls.”

The woman said she did not know why Rehman wanted to harass her.

For the prosecution Celia Record said: “The Crown says over that six-month period of time there was a sufficient course of conduct for you to find harassment and Mr Rehman has failed to give explanation in interview and he has failed to explain it today.”

The case against Rehman had been adjourned from last Monday because the Crown Prosecution Service had failed to present its evidence against the defendant in time.

Mountains of documents submitted as evidence were later found to be inadmissible because relevant paperwork had not been completed.

Bench chairman John Lavers dismissed an application for Rehman to pay £650 costs because of the failures in the prosecution’s case and instead ordered he pay just £200.

He said: “We were less than happy with the way The Crown presented its case. We think it could have been presented in a much clearer manner.”